Dominance and submission is about control rather than compromise, power rather than sex, and has as a basis for these things a trust that can be so profound, it seems almost an impossibility.
Contents
1.0 Overview
2.0 D/s Lifestylers
- 2.1 Use of the Terms "Master" and "slave"
- 2.2 Trust
- 2.3 Consent
- 2.4 Artistic Expression and Training
- 2.5 Obedience, Happiness, and the Need to Serve
- 2.6 Slavery and Ownership
- 2.7 Collaring
- 2.8 Punishment and Conflict
- 2.9 Scenes and Safewords
- 2.10 Humiliation, Objectification, and Self-Esteem
- 2.11 Social and Psychological Issues
1.0 Overview
D/s is probably the facet of BDSM that is least understood by people who don't take part in it. The vanilla layman looks at sadomasochism and sees the sadist and the masochist doing their thing for mutual pleasure, and even if the layman doesn't like it or doesn't understand it, it is still obvious what the people are doing and why. Layfolk and BSDM'ers sometimes use the term S&M to mean the entire scope of all things kink, leading to further confusion; perhaps this is an unconscious attempt to lump the esoteric bondage & discipline and dominance & submission into the more-well-known word S&M. Besides, all three sets often occur together whenever a reference is made, so in the minds of layfolk, it's all the same thing. They think of whips and chains, collars and punishment, naked slaves addressing their Dominants as "Master" or "Mistress", bondage and spankings. This is not entirely innacurate - there are many kinky people who participate in all of these simultaneously.
D/s is not about the hardware, it's not about pain, it's not about bondage. D/s is about an exchange of power. It is a relationship in which the balance of power is unequal. It is about the mind, about psychological control and internal (mental) enslavement. It's no wonder the layfolk have a hard time understanding, especially since anything BDSM is usually a taboo topic in mainstream US culture, and there are many who would argue that BDSM is sick, wrong, or an indication of mental illness.
D/s is not for everyone, any more than golf or tequila or politics is for everyone. And for those who do claim it as their kink, the depth to which D/s is a part of their lives will vary from them using it to add a little extra spice in their sex lives to being a part of a 24-7 total power exchange (alternatively referred to as a lifestyle relationship or a Master/slave relationship). D/s-ers can arise from all walks of life - any sexual orientation, any profession, any personality, any ethnicity, any culture. As such they can be wonderful people with whom to cultivate a friendship or a relationship, or they can be complete and utter assholes.
For purposes of discussion, D/s-ers can be sorted into two broad categories: the first contains those for whom a power exchange is extra spice in a sexual encounter. They may use the terms "Master" and "slave", and one of them might wear a collar; but those terms are usually reserved for the bedroom, and the collar may just be another attachment point (a la bondage). After the spankings are dealt and the rope is put back in the toy chest, they are back on equal footing and will go about negotiating their compromises like most other vanilla couples. Some form relationships that are for D/s play only; i.e., they do not interact with each other beyond the bedroom.
When D/s partners are interacting with each other sexually, an observer might not be able to tell whether it is bedroom-only D/s or lifestyle D/s (see below) - when actively being practiced, the two can be very similar.
Some people may even be engaging in mild D/s without realizing it; this is especially common in anyone who has the mental wiring for D/s but who has not consciously acknowledged or accepted their urges. Unfortunately, these kinds of people also tend to unconsciously seek out partners who will match them - submissives can easily find themselves with overbearing, abusive partners; Dominants may demand more of their vanilla partners than they are willing to give.
The terms "Dom" or "Domme" (female), "Dominant", "sub", "submissive", and "switch" are all for general use - even someone who enjoys only the slightest bit of sexual submission or dominance in the bedroom could use these terms to describe themselves. A switch is someone who enjoys both roles, not necessarily at the same time nor with the same partner.
2.0 D/s Lifestylers
The second category contains people who are sometimes called "lifestylers"; these are the people upon whom the primary focus of this writeup rests. D/s is a way of life for them, or more accurately, a way of relationship. The relationships that will make them the happiest are the ones that have a power exchange at their core. Whatever aspects of S&M or bondage they might enjoy, they have a need for D/s. Their minds are wired to want to surrender or to take control, almost a screw the roses, send me the thorns attitude. This does not mean that submissives are all meek soft-spoken pushovers and dominants are all type-A take-charge bullys... the personality of a Dom/me or sub rarely reflects that wiring to the rest of the world. A shrewd eye and ear might pick out a D/s lifestlye couple while they are together in public, but around anyone else the Dom is simply that unassuming quiet guy, and the sub is that non-conformist free spirit.
This category contains a spectrum of people and their wants and needs; it also contains couples in various stages of their relationships. For some lifestylers, the goal is to have a partner in a 24-7 total power exchange or Master/slave relationship. Finding said partner is just as difficult as a vanilla person finding a vanilla partner. Just because a Dom and a sub are on the market for an M/s relationship doesn't mean they're automatically compatible. Just like in a vanilla relationship, a lifestyler needs to find a partner who shares at least some portion of their worldview, hobbies, likes, dislikes, and kinks.
If two D/s'ers meet and take an interest in each other, their relationship can grow over time, just like a vanilla one. If we consider an M/s relationship to be most 'advanced' point possible for D/s, and liken it to a vanilla marriage, then we can also draw a few other ideas from the analogy: first, An M/s relationship should not be rushed. If you have only known your partner for a few months, then offering yourself to them as their slave or accepting an such an offer from your partner is generally a bad idea. Second, people do change, and sometimes they change more than the relationship can bear.
Though the nature of an M/s relationship lends itself to a stability that is more pervasive than is usually found in the vanilla realm, things can still go so wrong that the conflict resolution mechanisms just can't cope. This is not to imply that vanilla relationships are by default less stable than M/s relationships. It's just that D/s and M/s relationships have some extra communication channels and conflict resolution mechanisms that can be used to enhance the levels of trust beyond that which is possible in the vanilla world. I once described the level of trust in my M/s relationship to a vanilla friend; her response was something along the lines of, "Wow. I can't fathom putting that much trust in anyone, even a partner."
A lot of the stuff in section 2 can apply to D/s relationships that are not total power exchanges. It's just that with the TPE's, this stuff is going on all the time, and its frequency in non-TPE's will vary from relationship to relationship.
2.1 Use of the terms "Master" and "slave"
First, I speak from the viewpoint of a female sub involved in an M/s relationship, hence I will be drawing on my own experiences from time to time, and I will be using the default pronouns of a male Master and a female slave. There are plenty of male slaves and female Mistresses out there too, and of course same-sex couples. In case it isn't clear, in a Venn diagram of dominant and submissive (with the overlap between those two circles being switch), Master and slave are sub-sets of Dom and sub. The differences between Master and Dom, and slave and submissive, are not always clear nor necessarily agreed-upon by all practitioners of D/s. Generally, they denote a difference in the degree to which D/s is a part of the relationship as a whole.
So, what is this Master/slave thing? Slavery is illegal, right? Yes. But a D/s slave has entered into the relationship because she wants to do so. Her submission was not beaten nor coerced out of her; she gave it willingly to her Master; he understands and treasures this gift of self and trust, and will use it for the betterment and happiness of both of them. So long as neither partner irreparably violates the other's trust, they exist in a harmonious balance of complete surrender and complete control. For most people in such relationships, the best words to describe themselves are Master and slave.
It isn't legally slavery - a slave's Master can't sell him or her (well, they could try, and you can bet the indignant slave would outright terminate the relationship); i.e., it isn't a physically binding slavery. Instead it is a mental enslavement - but don't take that to mean a total mental dependency, for this is not the case. It is a state of being in which the slave feels that she belongs to her Master, one in which the Master feels that he owns the slave; a state in which the slave's obedience to her Master is of utmost importance to her, a state in which the Master nurtures the slave and helps her grow. Just as in vanilla relationships, Masters and slaves don't need legalities or social constructs to tell them that they love each other.
Below, I will attempt to elucidate the various aspects of D/s, and how they figure into a total power exchange or Master/slave relationship.
In order for power to be given and received, there must be trust. This is true even in S&M scenes, since the bottom must trust the Top to understand their limits, and the Top must trust the bottom to articulate those limits. In D/s, people are dealing with power exchanges and dependancies that demand quantities of trust that go far beyond what you might place in your airline pilot, vanilla partner, or Top.
We all have people with whom we would trust our cars, our money, perhaps our lives, and maybe even our psyches. Think a moment on the bounds of that trust. And then imagine being in a relationship in which you can trust your partner with everything that you are, a relationship in which your trust knows no bounds. A relationship in which you trust them to look out for your physical well-being, even when and especially when you are helpless. One in which you trust them to make the right decisions about your career should they choose to take a hand in it. One in which you trust them to not hurt you, even though you drop all of your emotional barriers and armor while you are with them. One in which you trust them so much that you can tell them, "I will do anything you ask of me. Anything." This complete trust, this total power exchange, is one of the primary aspects of a slave.
Such trust must be earned by the Dominant over time. Some submissives give it too easily, and wind up being hurt mentally and/or physically because they gave it to an abusive Dom/me, or gave too much too soon; some of them may not even be capable of giving all of their trust. Some Dom/mes want more than their sub is willing to give at the time, and may push so hard they end up pushing the sub away from them. It is a complex dance, and it can be dangerous for the unwary sub whose instincts are screaming at her to do whatever this nice man tells her to do, even if she only met him a week ago.
2.3 Consent
Trust is given in the form of consent. As a sub comes to trust her Dom more and more, she will expand the list of things which she consents to do with or for him. Something I used to whisper in my Dom's ear early on in our relationship was, "I will do anything you ask of me - except your housework." While this was not the last nor most important part of my existence over which I would eventually give him consent, it does make a good example (and at the time, it was the only thing of which I was consciously aware to which I refused to surrender consent).
Eventually, a sub might give all their consent - all of their trust - to their Dom/me, allowing that person to henceforth have control over every aspect of the sub's life, should they wish to exercise it. This is the heart of the glorious contradiction that is a D/s or Master/slave relationship: how does one choose to have no choice? How does one consent to have no future consent? There is a name for it:
metaconsent; though that does nothing to help those who have never experienced it to understand it. By itself, this meta-consent may seem a little dry, or perhaps even impossible. But it is only a part of complete submission, only a part of what makes a slave.
Another aspect of this trust is the ability of the sub to remove their emotional armor around their Dominant. To some degree or another, all of us learn that we are vulnerable unless we hide some parts of ourselves from the world at large. We hide some of our emotions, we hide our crazier thoughts, we hide our fantasies, our impulses, our desires. We wear a mask or two or three, and if we're lucky we have a few close friends whom we know will not just tolerate, but accept, most of who we are.
Once the entirety of a sub's trust is given, she will discover that it has suddenly freed her from the need to protect herself, from the need to put a lid on her self-expression, and from the need to armor her heart when she is with her Dom. For this man has not only made sure he understands all of who she is, he has not only accepted it - he has embraced it. Every flaw, every fear, every dream, every hope, all of her; and in doing so, he has taken a sort of possession of her. She trusts him so completely that she can give all of herself to him, and knows that he will not harm her.
Training is not especially easy to comprehend. We all know about training pets and about training for a job. How does training work within the context of a D/s relationship? It is partially a natural extension of the inheret power exchange: the Dom has some form of consent of the sub to modify her behavior. Behavior modification occurs in every relationship, D/s and vanilla, and arguably in every friendship... but in the latter two, it occurs mostly on an unconscious level, and affects both partners equally. In D/s, the Dom can take an active, overt hand in it. Training usually does not take place until the Dom and sub have established a relationship that has some indications of being potentially long-term. It makes for rather open communication when combined with the sub's trust: since the sub can be emotionally open and freely express her opinions, and the Dom can make his wants and needs obvious, there is usually little guesswork involved in either partner trying to figure out whether the other is pleased or unhappy about something.
A few examples of training: some Doms may prefer certain kinds of etiquette-- a specific way of kneeling, times when it is appropriate, times when it is expected; a certain style of dress for specific occasions, times, or locations. A sub may just pick up on this sort of thing over time, or the Dom may drop hints or flat-out tell her what he wants. This "training" may be as simple as the sub being told once that she must always wear racy underwear, or it can be as complex as conditioning her to orgasm on command.
Training is not only a way to demonstrate the control that the Dom has over the sub; it is a way for the Dom to express himself through the sub, a way for him to be an artist, with the mind and body of a human being as his medium. And the medium, in this case, is willing - willing to be influenced, shaped, and changed in ways over which she has no final say. Willing to become whatever he wants her to be, because she trusts him to understand how he will affect her, trusts him to not make her into something she mislikes or even hates... trusts him to heed what she already is, and to use her own attributes as well as his desires in the sculpting.
The emotional connection that comes from this is utterly unlike anything else I have ever experienced. As a musician I can enter a state in which there ceases to be a dividing line between myself and the music I am making - with my Master, it is as if he is the musician and I the music; I become an extention of him, a sounding board for his needs and desires, but also an expression of my own as well. The ability and willingness to be shaped by and become an expression of the Dom are two more parts of what makes a slave.
2.5 Obedience, Happiness, and the Need to Serve
The word "obedience" used to leave a bad taste in my mouth, in part because American culture conditioned me to value independence and personal freedom above almost everything else, and in part because I had practically no conscious understanding of what it meant in terms of submission. It brought me pleasure to make my Dom happy, but I was not, as he put it, "eager to please". I was willing to serve him and had given him my meta-consent, but I found nothing erotic about it in and of itself. To this day I still do not fully understand the process that changed my willingness to serve into a need to serve him - it was, in fact, the last thing I ever expected; I didn't think I was capable of it.
I may not understand the 'how' of it, but I can elaborate on the 'what'. There was a gradual shift in what I wanted out of the relationship; like most people, I had a conscious desire to be made happy by my partner. I was still expecting certain things out of my dom, in the same way that vanilla partners expect birthday presents or orgasms from each other. I was still wanting him to do things for me, and still expressing those desires.
I gradually became aware of the idea that maybe I didn't have to tell him specifically what I wanted and when I wanted it - he probably already knew, and if he didn't, he would surely inquire. And along with this idea came another - that there was no real need for me to expect him to please me - that maybe, if this guy really was all I thought he was, he was perfectly capable and willing to look after my happiness without any guidence from me. Those two ideas spawned a third: if I put aside my own concerns for my happiness, I could focus entirely on him, knowing that he would be keeping my well-being in mind. I could forget about myself and turn all of my attention to pleasing him. It was a way to surrender another portion of control, a way to give him more of myself. It felt appealing, it felt right, it felt like a natural extension of the power exchange that was already in place.
Pleasing a Dom can incorporate vanilla stuff like cooking them a lavish meal or waiting on them hand and foot, but it can exist on a much deeper level: it can mean obeying them simply for the sake of obedience. It is not simply a matter of enjoying being told what to do-- there are some subs who like that but who are uninterested in the other aspects of total submission and surrender. It is a state in which your obedience is a source of pride and pleasure for yourself and your Dom. It is going beyond the mode of "How can I serve you now?" and into the realm of "My obedience to you matters more to me than anything else; you can test it all you want, and I will prove it to you again and again and again, because I am your slave and that is who I want to be."
To give a hypothetical example - if my Master told me to go stand outside without a coat on in a cold rain, I'd do it without a second thought (aside: this is more likely to be a play punishment than an instance of real punishment, there's more on that further down). So it's cold and wet, whoopee - I don't care. I'd stand there being cold and wet and pleased with myself that I obeyed, because I know he's pleased with me. If the phone rings and he goes into the other room to answer it, and then forgets about me for some period of time, I'll merrily stand there shivering. I'll stand there for hours if I must. If I were to become hypothermic, I'd tell him. If I were to become dangerously hypothermic, I'd use the safeword; If I couldn't find him, I'd do the smart thing he'd expect me to do - get myself inside, dry off, and warm up.
There is a good example of this kind of obedience towards the end of the movie Secretary (spoiler warning for this paragraph), though it can be construed as an example of real punishment as well, due to the conflict between the two characters at the time. When Edward tells Hathoway to put her hands on the desk and her feet on the floor and then storms out, she doggedly persists in obeying him even though he doesn't return for a few days! Even when someone physically removes her from the desk, she struggles out of his grasp and returns immediately. She is obviously miserable, and yet obviously hell-bent on obeying Edward, who watches unseen from the window, pleased and touched by her devotion.
It seems to be a viscious cycle of the good sort. I know that when I walk into my Master's home, he might just tell me to strip right then and there, perhaps without bothering to close the front door first... and I know I will obey him, even if I'm balancing a stack of books in my hands, even if I'm cranky, even if I'm just not in the mood. I know he can whisper a single word in my ear in public, and my conditioned response will be immediate arousal, whether I want it or not. I know he can forbid me from eating anything but oatmeal, rice, and fish for a week - and I will not only obey him, I will accept this restriction on my freedom and take pleasure in the opportunity to demonstrate my obedience even if I dislike the command. These demonstrations of control.... even thinking about how much control he has over me (how much control I have given him), about how willing I am to obey... they are arousing in and of themselves - which is positive reinforcement for those behaviors.
2.6 Slavery and Ownership
When we take all of those things together: the absolute trust, the metaconsent, the emotional openness, the willingness to be changed, the eagerness to please and the need to obey; we have the makings of a slave, a person who is capable of total submission and surrender. Not a slave in the physical sense, though physical restrictions on this person's freedom may occur; rather, we have someone who can be internally, mentally, enslaved. If that person is in a relationship with a Dom/me who has taken the time to earn their trust, who has openly accepted and embraced all that the submissive is, who has taken care to provide a relationship in which the sub has no need nor want to hide anything, who has never violated that most precious gift of submission and trust and obedience, who has guided and shaped the sub into someone who makes both of them happy, and who has acted in a way that meets the needs of the sub as well as themselves, then we have the makings of a Master/slave relationship.
When the sub has come to accept and revel in the total control that her Dom has over her, when her obedience comes naturally to her and she feels free to voice any objections to the commands, when she accepts her Master's influence in all parts of her life, when she understands that she is helpless in his power, and she has given her freedom into his hands for safekeeping to do with as he will, when she considers her property, her time, her body, and her mind to be his, when she cannot think of herself without the identity of belonging to her Master, then she has become a slave.
Her Master assumes total responsibility for her, though most Masters will require a fair amount of autonomous responsibility from their slaves; the majority of them have careers and full-time jobs, just as their Masters do. It's pretty pointless for a slave to contact her Master and ask him exactly what he wants on the grocery list every single time she goes to the store. Likewise, few Masters enjoy that sort of constant micromanagement. There aren't many house-slaves that stay at home all day, wearing nothing but a collar and doing nothing but housekeeping. Most slaves would find this stifling and boring; it is the responsibility of the Master to not demand this sort of thing from a slave who wouldn't enjoy it. Perpetually unhappy slaves tend to leave, especially if they've brought up their problems with their Master and have been ignored or punished (real, not play) for it.
"But wait!" you say, "Masters have the right to demand anything from their slaves, don't they? What you're saying sounds like the slave does have some power in the relationship." Yes, Masters do have that right. And yes, a slave can leave. But leaving is an oft-times final act of withdrawl of all consent; this is not a matter of an angry slave threatening to leave unless her Master fulfills some condition of hers, in the hopes that he will acquiesce. Such a demand is likely to be met with the Master releasing the slave from his service (i.e. terminating the relationship himself). An M/s relationship works so long as the Master has both his happiness and the happiness of his slave(s) in mind. As long as he does so, the slave feels safe enough to leave her happiness in his hands and place his own well-being and pleasure above everything else.
2.7 Collaring
This is what most D/s-ers regard as the final consumation of a Master/slave relationship: the Master 'collars' the slave, which usually involves him affixing a collar about her neck along with whatever else the two feel is appropriate. It can be an entire ceremony or a single perfect moment. Traditionally, the Master is the one who offers it; but it is not unheard of for a slave to tell her Master that she is willing to wear his collar.
How can you tell a collar that a Master has put on his slave from one that the slave has given to her Master to symbolize the gift of her submission, or from one used for play or simply for jewelry? You can't, short of asking the person.
2.8 Punishment and Conflict
This is often a source of confusion. There are two kinds: play punishment and 'real' punishment. The former is a style of play or interaction that can be found in D/s relationships along the entire spectrum of intensity. It involves the Dom 'punishing' the sub for some minor, playful, or role-played infraction, where the 'punishment' is something (bondage, spanking, whipping, sexual servitude) that both partners enjoy. If I manage to slip an ice cube down my Master's shirt, I will generally be told to hold still while he does the same thing to me, though this is a fairly mild and short-lived example.
In any case, this play punishment is not meant to correct any behavioral problems or resolve any conflicts. I would like to emphasize the difference here between playful and serious disobedience - refusing to reveal the location of your Master's car keys after you've hidden them is one thing; taking his car out for a spin without asking first is something else entirely. Even oft-repeated and ill-timed playfulness can result in real annoyance; a good Dom or Master will make it known when his patience is being stretched thin, giving the sub/slave fair warning before she crosses the line into serious disobedience.
Like any relationship, a D/s one will have its share of dissagreements and conflicts. If the relationship is not yet to the total power exchange state, then a simple withdrawl of some form of consent by the sub should be sufficient for her to make her wishes known. From that point on, until she gives her consent again, the conflict must be negotiated normally. Hopefully, by the time the power exchange has become total and metaconsent/submission has been given, the two have spent enough time building the relationship so that they know they will be able to resolve even the most serious issues. Once that line is crossed, the slave simply cannot put her foot down; she cannot demand anything, though she is ALWAYS free to leave. Slavery is a state of mind, not a binding legal contract. For her to make demands is tantamount to her indicating that she wants the relationship terminated. Certainly, she should be able to voice an objection and know that it will be heard; and after she has done so, if her Master doesn't change his mind, she either carries through or risks disobeying him. To knowlingly do the latter in a serious case is almost a slap in the face of the Master, though even this has a spectrum of severity.
If the transgression is only of a mild severity, things may be set right simply by an apology/explanation on the part of the slave. The same may be true of the more moderate ones; however, in some cases the slave may wish to ask her Master for (real) punishment. This sounds odd, but if you have ever wronged someone, had them accept your apologies, and yet still felt like shit for it and continued to berate yourself for some time afterwards, you can see why such a request might be made. No sense in beating yourself over the head for weeks if you can just go to your Master and say "I still feel horrible for doing that; could you please punish me so I can feel as if I've made up for it?"
Real punishment might be better termed corrective punishment. It is rarely, if ever, found anywhere except a lifestyle D/s relationship. It is generally used like positive punishment and negative punishment in operant conditioning, but in order to function properly in this role, it has to be something that the slave really doesn't like. If the slave is a masochist, whipping them isn't going to do any good, they'll just enjoy it. If she's an exhibitionist, trying to humiliate her (assuming she doesn't enjoy public humiliation in the first place) by ordering her to take off her shirt in public isn't going to work.
It is imperitave that the Master make it absolutely clear that he is in fact displeased, that he is truly punishing the slave instead of playing with her, and he should also elucidate exactly why she is being punished. The punishment must be something aversive enough so that in the future it will make the slave think twice before exhibiting whatever behavior elicited the punishment, but it should also fit the transgression and the slave herself. A Master who punishes a slave for accidentally calling him "Sir" when he wants to be called "my Lord", by confining her in a small cage for an hour when she happens to be claustrophobic, has no right to call himself 'Master'.
It can be used as a means of conflict resolution. If a slave violates her Master's trust by disobeying him, he might assign a punishment to her as a means of reaffirming her obedience - "You will complete this task as proof that you are willing to obey, else why should I continue to believe that you will ever do anything that I ask of you?" But once that task is completed, the slave is forgiven, the sin expiated, and both people put it behind them.
I should point out that Doms or Masters, being human and therefore not perfect, are not immune from needing to apologize. Due to the fact that the good ones generally possess large amounts of self-control, and to the nature of the relationship, it doesn't happen frequently; when it does, the slave knows it, and it increases her respect for him. Slaves don't have the right to demand an apology - they can't make demands, period. But the Master who has so much pride that he cannot allow himself to apologize even when he has obviously made a mistake is not worthy of anyone's submission. A Master need not apologize for directing his slave along a course of action which she dislikes - in a TPE, she has, after all, given him consent to do this. He might apologize to her if outside stresses got the better of him, and his anger leaked out when he snapped at her for no reason at all (part of that total trust given by the slave is the trust that her Master has enough self-control to not take external emotions out on her).
In any BDSM activity, the uttered safeword is a way for someone to bring everything to a halt if they fear for their safety, are being seriously injured, are having a phobia triggered, are having their limits pushed too far, etc. Some people will talk about doing away with the safeword in a M/s relationship - the slave has given up the right to say "I refuse to go on with this." And, indeed, this is correct. But there is no reason why a safeword cannot still be used in a total power exchange as a way for the slave to indicate that she feels *extremely* uncomfortable with what's going on. It's a red flashing danger light, not just an "I don't particularly like this." It is especially useful in any physical activity which might result in injury or asphyxiation; if a slave is experiencing an undesirable level of pain or an obstruction to her breathing, she should point this out - and if the Master continues and the pain becomes excruciating or she can't get enough air, then she can use the safeword. Any Master who doesn't heed it in a case like this is, quite frankly, dangerous.
One definition of a scene is a period of time in which BDSM activities take place. In S/M relationships, scenes have discreet start and end times; in D/s lifestyle relationships, it should be fairly obvious by now that the relationship has exceeded the boundaries of anything that might be called a scene. A total power exchange is not limited by scene time any more than it is limited to the bedroom. I elucidate this because one of the more common "warning signs" of an abusive BDSM relationship goes something along the lines of "If you're not sure when a scene starts and stops." This is simply misleading in the case of M/s; a total power exchange Master/slave relationship goes on all the time.
It is not uncommon for subs and slaves to like being objectified; such feeling can mesh quite nicely with the power exchange. It is difficult to describe objectification that is purely mental. I hesitate to say "imagine being treated like a piece of property rather than a person", because this carries an implication of mentally unhealthy activities - and yet, within the larger tapestry of D/s, it works. An example of physical objectification would be wearing a leash and collar, something usually reserved for pets in this society, thus it carries connotations of ownership.
Humiliation and objectification are often closely entwined, and they make a neat menege-trois with the power exchange: the basic idea being "If I own you, then I can do whatever I please with you." Being humiliated, even mildly, acts as a reinforcement of the slave's position. Most subs and slaves have at least some taste for it, whether they realize it or not. It can range from mild to a severity which the onlooker is likely to mistake for verbal abuse. An example of something mild would be for the Dom to physically bind the sub's feet in some way, and then tell her to fetch him something from the kitchen. She's either going to be taking annoyingly small steps, if she can move her feet at all, or be hopping around. When this happens to me, my Master and I both get a good laugh out of it. To combine this with play punishment, the Dom might alter the task such that the sub can't properly carry it out successfully- have her bring a beverage or something, which she is likely to spill while hopping, and then spanking her for doing so.
The verbal abuse-levels of humiliation - something that sounds like genuine anger, on the order of "You're worthless! You can't even carry out a simple task without me there watching over you! How can you expect me to get anything done if you're always making mistakes", etc, etc. do not appeal to me, thus I can't provide much insight. I just know there are people who get off on this sort of thing.
Oddly enough, properly-applied humiliation and objectification don't make a slave feel bad about herself. As already stated, they reinforce the power exchange - they make the slave realize just how much power she has surrendered, they make her feel helpless; and yet, at the same time, she is helpless in the hands of her Master, and there is a trust in him to not take things too far and actually damage her ego. It is a facet of the idea "I will do anything for this person, and let them do anything to me, because I trust them not to abuse that power."
An M/s relationship does all sorts of good things for the minds of both partners. A Master feels the pride and satisfaction of knowing that he has earned so much of the trust of the slave that she has given him complete power over her. He knows that the slave is someone upon whom he can rely, someone whom he can trust. He also gains the satisfaction of helping her grow as a person.
In her Master, the slave has found someone who accepts her unconditionally. Because she can trust him completely, she can give him everything she has to give, and know without doubt that he fully understands the extent of that gift. In doing so, the slave can find a kind of rare peace: the peace of knowing that they have given everything, given all of themselves, in an act of pure selflessness.
2.11 Social and Psychological Issues
Slavery, as practiced in D/s, does not break down a person and make them into an emotional wreck who is dependant on their Master/Mistress for all of their self-esteem (if it did so, D/s'ers would classify that as an abusive relationship). Indeed, it does quite the opposite. Masters generally like to have a very good idea of what's going on inside the heads of their slaves; Masters with enough experience and knowledge of psychology tend to sniff out problems and then guide the slave, whether she realizes it or not, into dealing with them. Commonly-addressed problems include phobias and various kinds of low-self-esteem (a loving D/s relationship will tend to build self-esteem that a sub will carry with her for the rest of her life, even if the relationship ends). I know of very few vanilla relationships in which this naturally happens the way it does in M/s. I wouldn't label all M/s or D/s relationships as psychotheraputic; but at the very least, interacting with someone who is compatible with your sexuality does tend to feel good, mentally and physically.
Doubtless there will be some of you who support the idea of women's lib and sexual equality who are enraged at what you've read. Folks, believe it or not, most people would classify me as a feminist. I am positively sick of the traditional gender roles that some portions of this society feel the need to force on others. At the same time, I've got this chunk of wiring in my head that urges me to seek out a partner with whom I can shed all my armor, drop my inhibitions, and know I will be perfectly safe - and the only way I can do that is if he has earned my complete and total trust by being extraordinarily careful with the increasing amounts of control I've given to him. I consider myself to be a liberated female, unhindered by gender roles. By submitting to my Master, I am not giving up that hard-won freedom - I'm placing it into his hands for safekeeping. It's quite a gift.
This node is a work in progress - every couple of months I try to come back to it and edit it in an attempt to make it better. Please feel free to contact me via email if you wish to discuss this node.